Which makes any argument in which one dithers over a "4" or a "5" even more irrelevant, given the baffling relationship of a British squad's firepower factor in ASL, and the reality of how many men were firing weapons, and which kinds. Battlefield questionnaires made it clear that while on paper it was 8 rifles, an SMG and an LMG, in reality it was an LMG, perhaps 3 Lee Enfields, and a harried "Squad Leader" with a Sten.
I agree with the spirit of this, if not the conclusion. All armies will suffer from less than much less than possible FP generated. Whether this is due to the British LOB, lack of sufficient rifle training or simple, natural terror, the effect is the same. Most studies, that I have heard of, suggest that less than half contribute meaningfully in a firefight.
When trying to to put a value on a squad (and ASL is all about numbers), I figure the rifle part to be about 3 (maybe 4 for semi-auto rifles) on the basis that the target unit knows they are faced by more than one or two men and a fair number of them are firing at them. IE mainly a morale effect, with some chance of casualties (2 or 3 such 3 FP squads are far more deadly, quantity has a quality of its own). The addition of a LMG to a squad, usually manned by the better squadies, brings the squad up to a FP column with a bit more breaking power (reflecting more single casualties).
The addition of a second LMG (again manned by the better troopers) should have some effect on the effective FP of a squad. Ditto the replacement of a large percentage of rifles with semi-auto rifles or SMG. If you start with a 10 man squad with SMG, LMG and 8 rifles/carbines and only 50% fire you will probably find the ones that are firing are the SMG (SL), LMG and 2 rifles (the LMG loader will not be firing). If you replace a rifle with a LMG you will then most likely get SMG, 2 LMG firing. That is still an increase in FP. All this is assuming the usual practise in allocating the better and more reliable soldiers to any LMG. There will still be some target morale effect due to the (believed) presence of the rest of the squad even if their fire is sporadic and ineffective. The infantry part of ASL is mainly about morale with kills taking second place.
The part of ASL FP that we can quantify is the weapon mix. This should form the basis of what counters we design and possibly use. The training, combat experience, percentage of full TO&E present. percentage of veterans and physical and mental exhaustion and health should be the things that help us decide what goes into a side's scenario counter mix and ERL.
If both sides are in a similar state of morale, strength and experience then similar mixes of elite, 1st and 2nd line troops should be used. If one side is mainly grandfathers, children and village idiots with a very few veterans then conscript troops with two or three squads of elite troops is appropriate.
If you are modelling late '44 VG troops then the mix should be something like 30% 547, 60% 447 and 10% 436, ERL 2. The performance of the VG in Wacht am Rhein was variable. Some divisions were as good as their predecessor infantry divisions, some were fairly worthless. For the better units, throw in some 548, maybe ERL 3. A scenario designer should aim to reflect units that were heavily armed with automatic weapons, often enthusiastic, often with a core of veterans but in general lacked sufficient training and brittle. Like a glass sliver can cut deep but breaks easily.
Any non-computer generated "shot by shot" simulation or game will not be able to produce some
absolute FP and casualty generation. At best it can hope is to get some close approximation of
relative FP. All different counter values do is supply the scenario or CG designer with a set of building blocks or tools. It is up to the designer to decide what mix of squads, SW, leaders and ERL should reflect his/her interpretation of an action and adjust as a result of playtesting.
Because ASL will at best reflect relative strengths, the absolute strengths are less important. It is thus valid to use full strength TO&E units as the building blocks in a scenario and adjust one sides mix, numbers, leaders, ERL and SW to reflect
relative states of training, experience, morale, strength percentage and exhaustion.